Long War: Obama’s ISIS Strategy Will Mean Years of Steady Escalation

Last week, President Obama admitted to not having a strategy for victory over ISIS, and that remains the case. Yet at today’s NATO summit, he laid out what amounts to a strategy for ever increasing escalation of the conflict.

Today, Obama announced the acquisition of a number of NATO members as allies for that conflict, and aides indicated that there will be many more diplomatic efforts to secure more and more across the region.

The long-term diplomatic effort, along with the lack of any serious strategy that could conceivably “win” the war, means that the weeks of steady escalation we’ve already seen of the war are going to be continued over the very long term.

The plan to build a “moderate” rebel alternative to ISIS in Syria, which the US has been trying, and failing, to pull off for years, is going to be pushed on for years longer, while the US builds up its involvement in the war on the Iraqi side, and eventually gives up on the futile effort to manufacture a pro-US Syria faction and expands the war outright into Syria.

The goals of the war remain nebulous, though in recent days the president and other administration officials have talked up the outright destruction of ISIS as a key part of the conflict.

So far, everything the US has done in the war has actually run contrary to that goal, as the US involvement and repeated escalations have simply added to ISIS’ profile and allowed it to recruit in ways unimaginable before.

The lack of a cohesive strategy for the war itself, and the focus on a quasi-strategy of escalation, means not only many years of war, but likely myriad additional US missteps that are playing right into the ISIS leadership’s hands.

We said it from day one: Barack Hussein Obama strategy is about Saudis and UAE, ISIS was created to escalate the war in Middle East and continue the Middle East turmoil for a long time to come. Obama living the office in one year, what he has created is a barbaric state of ISIS and he is not going to do anything about it, he simply have left his/Saudis/UAE creation for the people in middle east to solve.

All that talk about orgonizing western governments to fight ISIS is yet another manipulative and horse sheeeet talks, he simply believes that people in Middle East don't deserve any better. Otherwise he wouldn't openly say that : these nation or people been at war with one and the other for hundred of years.

Even if one take his words at face value, one also needs to know that the caliphate regime only existed in 500bc and in Saudi Arabia at the same time it is his and the English and some European Neo liberal regimes that are in cooperation with yet a modernized caliphate regime as Saudis, kissing the kings hand and doing a favoritism to expend Saudis religious, while such friends, Saudis regime beheading people every day, in month of August alone 22 people beheaded by Saudi regime. While human rights advocates in Qatar and other UAE been prisoned for now.

Be sure to read the END, for an IMPORTANT solution to the Israel-Palestinian problem.
We are seeing news about beheadings in Iraq and Syria in the current news.
This is actually “Old Hat” in religion. Same old, same old. In my opinion, being burned alive is worse. Takes longer, for one thing.
Religion has been there, done both.
For example:
Beheadings and Burning Alive in the Christian Religion.
Reading the Bible was banned for 1230 years……by the Church.
Owning a Bible was a criminal offence
In 860, Pope Nicholas I, sitting high on a throne built specially for the occasion in the town square, pronounced against all people who expressed interest in reading the Bible, and reaffirmed its banned public use (Papal Decree). In 1073, Pope Gregory supported and confirmed the ban, and in 1198, Pope Innocent III declared that anybody caught reading the Bible would be stoned to death by ‘soldiers of the Church military’ (Diderot’s Encyclopedia, 1759). In 1229, the Council of Toulouse, ‘to be spoken of with detestation’, passed another Decree ‘that strictly prohibits laics from having in their possession either the Old or New Testaments; or from translating them into the vulgar tongue’. By the 14th Century, possession of a Bible by the laity was a criminal offence and punishable by whipping, confiscation of real and personal property, and burning at the stake.
Beheading ordered by the Emperor Constantine, who was the keynote speaker at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, where Christianity was Invented.
From Nexus Magazine: https://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/doc_view/1…
Constantine then decreed that the
New Testimonies would thereafter be called the "word of the
Roman Saviour God" (Life of Constantine, vol. iii, p. 29) and
official to all presbyters sermonising in the Roman Empire. He
then ordered earlier presbyterial manuscripts and the records of
the council "burnt" and declared that "any man found concealing
writings should be stricken off from his shoulders" (beheaded)
(ibid.). As the record shows, presbyterial writings previous to the
Council of Nicaea no longer exist, except for some fragments that
have survived.

Burning Alive in the Crusades: http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_cru1.htm “ On the way to the Middle East, they decided that only one of their goals was to wrest control of Jerusalem from the Muslims. A secondary task was to rid the world of as many non-Christians as possible – both Muslims and Jews. The Crusaders gave the Jews two choices in their slogan: "Christ-killers, embrace the Cross or die!" 12,000 Jews in the Rhine Valley alone were killed as the first Crusade passed through. Some Jewish writers refer to these events as the "first holocaust." Once the army reached Jerusalem and broke through the city walls, they slaughtered all the inhabitants that they could find (men, women, children, newborns). After locating about 6,000 Jews holed up in the synagogue, they set the building on fire; the Jews were burned alive. The Crusaders found that about 30,000 Muslims had fled to the al Aqsa Mosque. The Muslim were also slaughtered without mercy.

Believe it or not, I am a Korean War Veteran. (didn't go there-It wasn't ended when I enlisted-to avoid bad grades at UC Berkeley-got an incomplete for the semester only)
I bring that up, because the war ended with a peace that still stands between the two countries, and that was 60 years ago.
Couldn’t the Israeli – Palestinian war end similarly with a demilitarized zone, like Korea? There would not be a need for either a blockade or tunnels.

There was a truce with a DMZ (Demilitarized Zone-It's still there today, and the war is technically not ended, but the killing ended) . "The US, on the other hand, did commit its own troops as part of a UN international-peace keeping force. In reality, the UN force was in name only; the troops were made up of almost entirely American forces, with some American allies. The Korean War was the first instance that it became clear that the UN could be used by the US as a foreign policy tool."
There was a DMZ in the Vietnam War as well.

Your suggestion might be possible IF there were a definite line of division. But with the Palestinians corralled in pockets all over the place there is no way to divide the people – unless you relocate a whole bunch of people in an even-handed way…and that is not going to happen because the Israelis have already said they will not give back any of the land they've stolen, because they believe it's really theirs anyway.

Besides, in order to execute a real truce, there has to be a will on both sides to stop the carnage – and the Israelis have given no indication that they want that to happen anytime soon.

The goal here for the administration is to let the cancer (ISIS) spread to Assad internal organs, at which point Assad will be on his death bed, in come the so-called "moderate rebels" and pull the plug. Assad gone, the US and its Allies can now put boots on the ground to deal with ISIS, not to mention, military bases and airfields. With such strong coalition it would be hard for any countries in the regions to challenge their authority…..and yes, they now would have open the gates of hell to Iran, which is their intentions by the way.

What else is new? If anyone wants to get ISIS — will go after financing, supply of arms, spare parts, ammunition, food, clothes, telecommunications, and web-presence. NOT TOO COMPLICATED.

But by assembling the creaking European coalition, US will have one objective: have the weak European allies come along to make it look like it is not just US — and and the promise that some goodies are to be earned by Europe when spoils of Middle East are divided. Same neocon logic, and will fail in the same manner. In Afghanistan — Pakistan was the collateral damage, an example of state that served as the logistics center for US "war on terror". So, the lesson for Jordan and Saudi Arabia. The objective of "long war" is to let ISIS rampage, while the White West comes on the White Horse and with White Hat — to "rescue" them. But if they wanted to be "rescued", they will have to pay dearly. Kurds will get independence, at the cost of becoming colony and their energy resources taken away by White West oil majors. Iraq wants to be saved? There are all sorts of conditions, like military occupation, energy resourced handover, separation from Iran, itd, itd. Syria wants to be saved? Turn it into Saudi Protectorate, Saudi Arabia in itself is just a US colony. Make Turkey into NATO colony again. Thus, looong war to restructure (re-grab) Middle East. Fly in the ointment? ISIS is a conglomerate of interests, and to keep in ON TASK, will not be possible. What if they decide that they had enough of Israel? Or US colonies of Jordan or Saudi Arabia? And please, with all this "anti-Syria rebel" arming and directing — was Russia fooled? Iran fooled? Turkey fooled? China, India, Pakistan fooled? No, and thus — ISIS must be choke full of agents from all the regions, that will make ISIS dangerous to the CREATORS, and make any war, short or long — a mess for those who intended to profit from it. Sun Tzu: "Nobody Ever Profited From Long War".

Yes they did and are doing it, Saudis Arabia is the master mind creating ISIS, in long term although it might sound that USG/English is the guilty one in creating ISIS, which 150% true, but the idea is for Saudis/UAE to dominate the oil and other natural resources in both Syria and Iraq. ISIS have no other source of buyers beside Turkish/Saudis/UAE/Jordanians black market to sale, whereby these governments would sale it to BP, chevron, Exxon, and all other oil companies.

The price that ISIS is getting is less then 30 dollars a barrel which is the reason for lately gasoline prices going down in US. So longer for ISIS to exist more profit and domination by ISIS becomes the Saudis/US/Europeans oil companies profits.

The creation of ISIS is what USG/English and Saudis/UAE wanted, the only social political way to stop the unity between Iranian/Iraqi/Syrian governments, a economical, political force which could have developed into a new wave of democracy in Middle East, both against Israel and Saudis brutal and to some point inhuman regimes, this development would have been the thug in the eys iof western/Saudis/Israel brutal/apartheid/fascistic regimes, this unification was supported by Libya and many other countries around the world.

ISIS is that political wing, the fifth military/religious column created by Saudis/UAE/English/USG to stop all and every kind of unification in Middle East.

The western support is given a new green light to Israel to do whatever to destroy those that are or might become part of that unifications, Hezbollah and people of Gaza are part of it, here, although Saudis/UAE donate money to people in Gaza but they profit, both politically and economically, as long as they can brake the middle eastern unity/unification deciting the Palestinians people. Such unification means the end of Israel/Saudis/UAE/USG/EU rule in Middle East. Therefore, Barack Hussein Obama and every other beneficial government created ISIS, otherwise they are not that stupid, although their foreign policy shows otherwise.

I think the strategy is to keep the military industrial complex, donors, and foreign governments in control happy and in a good mood for the upcoming election. ISIS also provides an excuse for the national security jobs program. War with Iran is still on the table. ISIS isn't much of a threat because if it was the US would be in bed with Assad and Iran. It pretty much rejected Syria and Iran's overtures. I think a lot of this is about the hawks in the US wanting to be part of the carnage at a safe distance and protecting the Kurds for Israel.

Sterling accomplishment, retard! (From the MIC point of view anyway, and really, aren't those the bags of sh!t that REALLY matter in the grand scheme of things?) That the merchants of death still have willing customers, in perpetual conflicts all over the world. We stretch 'em out FOREVER, oh how civilized and enlightened we are!
By hook or by crook, we kill. We help kill. We spin lies so the killing can continue and we can profit. And they say, so what, man has been fighting for thousands of years…let's give them rifles instead of sticks and stones, to better their killing capacity.

What if other foreign govts began funding, arming, and training American Rebel groups to get rid of Democrats/Republicans? Would that be acceptable to the international community? This is why what Obama and NATO are doing to Assad is illegal. They are knowingly and willingly fomenting armed rebellion against the recognized govt of Syria. Its one thing to simply just watch from the sidelines and offer verbal support to the rebels but entirely different when actually participating in it.

sub-text: if ISIS are all killed, how will MI5/6 recruit jihadis in the future…with the help of alleged recruiter Choudary, of course.

Guardian: Isis fighters must be allowed back into UK, says ex-MI6 chief
However, Richard Barrett, a former counter-terrorism chief at MI5 and MI6, said repentant fighters needed "to know that there is a place for them back at home"…
In today's Observer, the controversial British Islamist Anjem Choudary acknowledges Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of the self-declared Islamic State, as "the caliph of all Muslims and the prince of the believers"…
Choudary, who has had links with a number of Muslims convicted under UK anti-terror laws, dismissed the allegations against Isis as propaganda, expressing his admiration for the jihadi state and claiming that Christians were voluntarily returning to Isis-ruled Mosul because they wanted to live under sharia law… http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/06/rich…